Frank Miller's 300
- Thread starter fuxberg
- Start date
Aazealh, I don't know if you've read the books themselves, but Miller's work was not accurate, it was purely dramatized/over done for the carnal pleasure of fiction, and I -highly- doubt the movie will be any different. There are probably full plot caps of the GN that show the variations, though I don't know myself if they exist, but this is the internet. Again, I myself will tell you that if it remotely stays on course with the GN it will be the equivalent of saying Custer's Last Stand involved him taking down an army of 300 Ninjas with the back of his pistol.Aazealh said:
sarahofborg
goodbye assholes
Aazealh said:
I never said it WAS accurate. That was my point! That it's not!
And I was replying to this:
That sounded like a complaint against the accuracy of the movie to me. Besides, while people here might know better, a good 90% of the real movie critics out there don't seem to.
And I've seen those repeating crossbows from China. They were on the weapons program on the history channel the other day. They were a *bit* bigger than the one Guts carries around, and they really didn't penetrate well. Also, they shot 1 arrow per second, whereas Guts' shoots like 5 per second.
Yhea, nothing realistic in Berserk at all. I think we all know that.
Manji said:
Dude, I really think you should read threads before you reply to them. That'll prevent you from missing the point like you just did.
sarahofborg said:
Your point was that Berserk is supposed to be historically accurate and that it fails at it. It wasn't a smart thing to say.
sarahofborg said:
Actually that's untrue. Most seem to understand it well enough. But nobody here cares anyway.
sarahofborg said:
A little late to say that, don't you think? Hard to be credible after saying it'd be impossible to recreate even in modern times. I'm sure you've seen them on Wikipedia or wherever else right before you posted this though.
sarahofborg said:
You're wrong again, there's plenty of realistic things in Berserk. To be honest I'd shake this off as a joke if it weren't you.
Well I think to a degree "300" needs to be given into the "Magic of Movies" versus another "based on a true story". It doesn't attempt to say that's ever the case. For instance, there are several flat out "white lies" in films like Hidalgo and The Last Samurai, both of which to some extent tried to tie in historical fact with movie fiction. Frank Miller's 300 does neither, its not intended to be a historical retelling of the Battle at Thermopylae, the fact that it's called "300" itself proves this. I do agree that some people are too eager to strike down any negative criticism about it. Whatever the case, I'm looking forward to it myself, I'm just going to go in with what I read from the novel and know its just a movie.
As for realism in Berserk...eh, I don't like pure works of fiction receiving real world debates. It's not trying to remotely tie in to our real world any more than Lord of the Rings made allusions to World War II nor should our physics be forced onto a work that uses such systems as Ode and Magic as carnal laws.
For example, Guts' repeating crossbow has its own mechanics, and while it fires "fast", the arrows are not exceeding crossbow speeds, just their fire rate. Even that is subject to debate how "fast" he really is firing.
As for realism in Berserk...eh, I don't like pure works of fiction receiving real world debates. It's not trying to remotely tie in to our real world any more than Lord of the Rings made allusions to World War II nor should our physics be forced onto a work that uses such systems as Ode and Magic as carnal laws.
For example, Guts' repeating crossbow has its own mechanics, and while it fires "fast", the arrows are not exceeding crossbow speeds, just their fire rate. Even that is subject to debate how "fast" he really is firing.
Manji said:
I'd like to repeat again that everybody's aware of this and has been since before the movie was announced. I don't even know why people are bringing this argument into the thread. If anything I'm more curious to know how faithful the movie is to the graphic novel.
With all due respect to the participants, let's just hear opinions of those who've seen it instead of having useless semi-debates.
sarahofborg
goodbye assholes
Aaz, you have an amazing knack for interpreting everything I say to mean the exact opposite of what I actually meant.
Anyhow, I just saw the movie myself in IMAX. Like, I just walked in the door now. Yes, I have plenty to say about it, but not nearly what I thought I'd be saying. I have a feeling I'll get a lot of shit for my opinions on this, so please just keep in mind that these are merely first impressions, and are exactly what I'm honestly thinking.
First, I would like to mention my only major disappointment, and in no way was this a hindrance to the actually quality of the film. I merely expected something I didn't get. I was told that this film had a heavy-metal soundtrack, which is utterly untrue. Only during one battlescene do I even recall hearing an electric guitar. The majority of the film's score was choir singing and percussion, and actually somewhat unimpressive. If I heard the music again I wouldn't recognize it, it was not memorable. At times it was *very* loud (what with the 12,000 watt speakers and all) but it serves more to accent the movie rather than add to it. It was background music, and nothing particularly original or significant. I was disappointed there. Not to say that the music sucked, but it sure could have been better. On the way home I played my ES Posthumous CD and imagined how much better it would have been with that music.
Anyhow, it was a remarkable movie, and certainly better than most of it's genre in recent times. I liked it better than I liked Gladiator. It was gorgeous and Very easy on the eyes (I couldn't stop drooling at the chiseled male bodies...). The action was all well choreographed, but rarely surprising. It got it's point across well, but in a way the movie didn't succeed at moving beyond the action and into any sort of heart-gripping emotion. I felt completely neutral towards the characters the entire time (well, I admit I liked the Queen, probably more than anyone! but she was far from the main character) I really can't explain why. I don't know.
The film was actually more accurate than I expected. The "mythological" creatures were really just exaggerated reality. The ogres were deformed humans. Baphomet was probably a guy in a goat costume. The immortals and such were diseased humans as well. They used Rhinoceros and Elephants in battle that were far large and stronger than life, and obviously did not actually appear in the real battle, but it was not uncommon in other battles in other places in the world at the time to use them. The only differences I could detect that were blatantly implausible was the fact that these guys are fighting nearly naked. A minor detail, and one I obviously didn't mind.
I haven't figured out why, but I gotta say that I wasn't as amazed as I hoped to be. It wasn't less than I expected, in fact in a way it felt predictable or formulaic, yet it never failed at being perfect.
Anyhow, I just saw the movie myself in IMAX. Like, I just walked in the door now. Yes, I have plenty to say about it, but not nearly what I thought I'd be saying. I have a feeling I'll get a lot of shit for my opinions on this, so please just keep in mind that these are merely first impressions, and are exactly what I'm honestly thinking.
First, I would like to mention my only major disappointment, and in no way was this a hindrance to the actually quality of the film. I merely expected something I didn't get. I was told that this film had a heavy-metal soundtrack, which is utterly untrue. Only during one battlescene do I even recall hearing an electric guitar. The majority of the film's score was choir singing and percussion, and actually somewhat unimpressive. If I heard the music again I wouldn't recognize it, it was not memorable. At times it was *very* loud (what with the 12,000 watt speakers and all) but it serves more to accent the movie rather than add to it. It was background music, and nothing particularly original or significant. I was disappointed there. Not to say that the music sucked, but it sure could have been better. On the way home I played my ES Posthumous CD and imagined how much better it would have been with that music.
Anyhow, it was a remarkable movie, and certainly better than most of it's genre in recent times. I liked it better than I liked Gladiator. It was gorgeous and Very easy on the eyes (I couldn't stop drooling at the chiseled male bodies...). The action was all well choreographed, but rarely surprising. It got it's point across well, but in a way the movie didn't succeed at moving beyond the action and into any sort of heart-gripping emotion. I felt completely neutral towards the characters the entire time (well, I admit I liked the Queen, probably more than anyone! but she was far from the main character) I really can't explain why. I don't know.
The film was actually more accurate than I expected. The "mythological" creatures were really just exaggerated reality. The ogres were deformed humans. Baphomet was probably a guy in a goat costume. The immortals and such were diseased humans as well. They used Rhinoceros and Elephants in battle that were far large and stronger than life, and obviously did not actually appear in the real battle, but it was not uncommon in other battles in other places in the world at the time to use them. The only differences I could detect that were blatantly implausible was the fact that these guys are fighting nearly naked. A minor detail, and one I obviously didn't mind.
I haven't figured out why, but I gotta say that I wasn't as amazed as I hoped to be. It wasn't less than I expected, in fact in a way it felt predictable or formulaic, yet it never failed at being perfect.
I read through the GN (quickly) but from what I remember the movie is very faithful. Some bits of dialogue present in the GN are missing in the movie but it doesn't take away from the movie. If anything the movie gave the characters more character than the GN. Also absent from the movie is the male nudity presented in the earlier parts of the GN (no real loss there unless you're into that sorta thing).
I perfer the movie over the comic.
I perfer the movie over the comic.
Femto the Raven
The location of agony? The human soul.
Spoiler warning for those who have not read the GN, seen the movie, or read the historical account!
300 is a excellent film. Like the Graphic Novel is it based on and every "based on historical event" hollywood film, it takes MANY liberties with the historical account for the sake of action, adrenaline rush, fast pacing, and at the end of the day, a sense of closure.
The film is faithful to the historical account in that:
1. 300 Spartans (and several hundred archadians, didn't guess that from the title did you?) stand against the Persian army, holding them at a narrow pass for a immpressive amount of time.
2. Xerxes does not die in the battle. (i'm not sure if this is up for debate but 90% of the people I saw it with where hoping he'd get killed off despite the fact it didn't happen historically)
And 3. They (the spartans) are betrayed by one of their own, are surrounded, and die. Their sacrifice however does give sparta (and the rest of greece) time (and the motivation) to stand against the invading armies of Persia.
The rest of the movie is dramatic fabrication, but not at all of a bad sort. I found the movie inspiring, moving, packed ot the gills with gorey good action, (this is how I imagine a live action berserk's melee scenes) and a general good time.
Great film.
300 is a excellent film. Like the Graphic Novel is it based on and every "based on historical event" hollywood film, it takes MANY liberties with the historical account for the sake of action, adrenaline rush, fast pacing, and at the end of the day, a sense of closure.
The film is faithful to the historical account in that:
1. 300 Spartans (and several hundred archadians, didn't guess that from the title did you?) stand against the Persian army, holding them at a narrow pass for a immpressive amount of time.
2. Xerxes does not die in the battle. (i'm not sure if this is up for debate but 90% of the people I saw it with where hoping he'd get killed off despite the fact it didn't happen historically)
And 3. They (the spartans) are betrayed by one of their own, are surrounded, and die. Their sacrifice however does give sparta (and the rest of greece) time (and the motivation) to stand against the invading armies of Persia.
The rest of the movie is dramatic fabrication, but not at all of a bad sort. I found the movie inspiring, moving, packed ot the gills with gorey good action, (this is how I imagine a live action berserk's melee scenes) and a general good time.
Great film.
Very visually impressive. Some of the best battle scenes ever orchestrated on film. Although, being a fan of the original graphic novel, I was disappointed by a lot of the stuff they added, as well as cut. I'll give a few examples, in case they haven't been discussed already.
Spoiler warning:
Like all that stuff they added with his wife, just felt out of place to me, and compared to other things in the movie, were quite lame.
Also, in the graphic novel, Ephialtes kills himself after Leonidas tells him that he can't use him in battle. This makes the audience think that he's gone, and then when you find out he survived, it's quite the surprise. In the movie, Ephialtes yelling, "YOU ARE WRONG LEONIDAS!" basically gave away the ending. I mean, did anyone who hadn't read the graphic novel prior to seeing the film, actually not be able to guess that Ephialtes would betray the Spartans after that? It was a lot more effective in the book.
And how they left out the Spartans calling Stelious Stumblious because he's so clumsy. He was a major badass in the film, but I still missed that. Frank Miller's sense of humor is one of the many things that makes him so great, so why take it away from his story?
I just don't see why they capture Miller's look so perfectly, but then discard his writing. The way he wrote it originally was perfect. Sure, like I said, some of the added stuff was really cool, (like the giant orc-looking warrior the immortals release), but they could have added those little things without drastically changing so much. So, as touching and as beautiful as this movie was, story wise, the book is still way better.
Spoiler warning:
Like all that stuff they added with his wife, just felt out of place to me, and compared to other things in the movie, were quite lame.
Also, in the graphic novel, Ephialtes kills himself after Leonidas tells him that he can't use him in battle. This makes the audience think that he's gone, and then when you find out he survived, it's quite the surprise. In the movie, Ephialtes yelling, "YOU ARE WRONG LEONIDAS!" basically gave away the ending. I mean, did anyone who hadn't read the graphic novel prior to seeing the film, actually not be able to guess that Ephialtes would betray the Spartans after that? It was a lot more effective in the book.
And how they left out the Spartans calling Stelious Stumblious because he's so clumsy. He was a major badass in the film, but I still missed that. Frank Miller's sense of humor is one of the many things that makes him so great, so why take it away from his story?
I just don't see why they capture Miller's look so perfectly, but then discard his writing. The way he wrote it originally was perfect. Sure, like I said, some of the added stuff was really cool, (like the giant orc-looking warrior the immortals release), but they could have added those little things without drastically changing so much. So, as touching and as beautiful as this movie was, story wise, the book is still way better.
Gonna slightly point out a flaw here as you noted, the only "300" are the Spartans themselves (THIS IS SPARTA, etc), but the number of Greek allies were WELL over a thousand, making the total forces nearly 1400-1600. Still, against 20,000+, but the actual label of 300 never implied the total number of Greeks vs Persians, just those people who love to dine in Hell. So the movie and GN kinda "mislabel" itself to get in that audience.Locus of Agony said:
Memory's rusty, but I'm pretty sure Xerxes lives long enough to have Leonidas' body quartered and decapitated. Other than that, sounds about as accurate as the GN was, but sounds better than the GN (Which I hope, again, wasn't too fond of it myself)Locus of Agony said:
well I just got back from watching it.
It was decent, good for action.. but thats about it.
I'd like to add, that the sword fighting was well done. A few minor things like one or two spins and fancy garbage that would get you killed in a real battle but overall it was better then some of the crap that happans in other movies. The slow motion was fun to watch.
Overall: Its a fun movie. until your butt falls asleep.
It was decent, good for action.. but thats about it.
I'd like to add, that the sword fighting was well done. A few minor things like one or two spins and fancy garbage that would get you killed in a real battle but overall it was better then some of the crap that happans in other movies. The slow motion was fun to watch.
Overall: Its a fun movie. until your butt falls asleep.
sarahofborg
goodbye assholes
I glanced at the GN while I was at the store today. The art was stunning, but I wasn't very compelled to read it after having seen the movie.
How many people who've seen this movie have seen other classic epics such as Spartacus or Ben Hur?
I'm gonna watch the original 300 Spartans from 1962 soon. I wonder if it'll be better? Not special-effects-wise, but just in overall quality.
I don't think this film has shit on Ben Hur or Spartacus, the best of the genre and ultimate classics. I mean, a CGI image of a 2 million man army is pretty and all, but a REAL image of tens of thousands of actors portraying an army is always superior.
If you havn't seen Spartacus and you have Comcast, you can watch it for free On Demand.
How many people who've seen this movie have seen other classic epics such as Spartacus or Ben Hur?
I'm gonna watch the original 300 Spartans from 1962 soon. I wonder if it'll be better? Not special-effects-wise, but just in overall quality.
I don't think this film has shit on Ben Hur or Spartacus, the best of the genre and ultimate classics. I mean, a CGI image of a 2 million man army is pretty and all, but a REAL image of tens of thousands of actors portraying an army is always superior.
If you havn't seen Spartacus and you have Comcast, you can watch it for free On Demand.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Sarahofborg, let me explain to you why you’ve gotten so much grief here.
First, you stated that you had a message for people complaining about the movie being historically inaccurate, which nobody was doing much of here at the time; then you posted an editorial that had nothing to do with that (and which was ironically full of popular misconceptions about ancient history to boot). Essentially, you wrote a bunch of romantic, meaningless fluff, and that’s what the image and comment about history I posted was directed towards.
Secondly, in your confused cross-arguments about the movie, you speciously compared it to Berserk when it comes to judging things on historical accuracy. That simply doesn’t make any sense. 300, while a work of fiction, is still a dramatized portrayal of a specific historical event, meaning its level of accuracy compared to said historical accounts is a factor, and fair game to discuss, debate, and judge the film by. Berserk, on the other hand, is a completely fictional story, taking place in a fictional fantasy World; it can’t be judged against history because it’s not portraying real historical places or events. At best, making that comparison is invalid, at worst, it’s stupid.
First, you stated that you had a message for people complaining about the movie being historically inaccurate, which nobody was doing much of here at the time; then you posted an editorial that had nothing to do with that (and which was ironically full of popular misconceptions about ancient history to boot). Essentially, you wrote a bunch of romantic, meaningless fluff, and that’s what the image and comment about history I posted was directed towards.
Secondly, in your confused cross-arguments about the movie, you speciously compared it to Berserk when it comes to judging things on historical accuracy. That simply doesn’t make any sense. 300, while a work of fiction, is still a dramatized portrayal of a specific historical event, meaning its level of accuracy compared to said historical accounts is a factor, and fair game to discuss, debate, and judge the film by. Berserk, on the other hand, is a completely fictional story, taking place in a fictional fantasy World; it can’t be judged against history because it’s not portraying real historical places or events. At best, making that comparison is invalid, at worst, it’s stupid.
sarahofborg
goodbye assholes
*edit* OK I just deleted my reply. Just, for cryin out loud, if you don't like my posts don't fuckin reply to them and move on. I'm really sick of this drama. Think I'm stupid if you like, just leave my personal integrity the hell alone. You can start by not replying to this.
Vampire_Hunter_Bob
Cats are great
sarahofborg said:
If you don't like the replies, don't post.
DemonX v.2.0
Smile!
I saw the movie, and I was dissappointed. Don't get me wrong, it was a better then average (at the least), I guess my expectations were put a little too high for this movie. Probably because of the commercials, I expected alot more action then there actually was, because the battles were not shown as a whole, just bits and parts.
And I'm not sure if everyone noticed this or if it was just my theater, but for everyone that has seen the movie, was the music slightly louder then the dialogue? There were several of parts where I missed what was said because of the music.
And I'm not sure if everyone noticed this or if it was just my theater, but for everyone that has seen the movie, was the music slightly louder then the dialogue? There were several of parts where I missed what was said because of the music.
Great movie. Highly enjoyable. I really get into movies, becasue I don't watch tv. I haven't watched tv in over a year. I always set very low standards for movies, so they are most of the time on par or better than I think they will be.
So, most movies are ok to me, even if considered low to others. there are two types of movies that really do it for me. Ones that are worse then my low standards, those really suck, badly, or ones like 300. Way better than what I thought. I was hyped up about it though, and it delivered what I thought, and more.
I did some research on Leonidas and the battle before I saw the movie, and realized that some parts were not accurate, but it's a movie, and that's what I treated it as. Well worth my time.
- C
So, most movies are ok to me, even if considered low to others. there are two types of movies that really do it for me. Ones that are worse then my low standards, those really suck, badly, or ones like 300. Way better than what I thought. I was hyped up about it though, and it delivered what I thought, and more.
I did some research on Leonidas and the battle before I saw the movie, and realized that some parts were not accurate, but it's a movie, and that's what I treated it as. Well worth my time.
- C
DemonX, I had the same sound problem, and I saw it at a state of the art Dolby equipped megaplex in Cincinnati, so I'm guessing it's the mix of the film. Honestly though, I don't think having heard all of the dialogue would have changed my opinion of the film. Great cinematography, no discernible plot.
Also, here is how I would sum up the other argument in this thread (Griffith is Hobbes):
Also, here is how I would sum up the other argument in this thread (Griffith is Hobbes):
sarahofborg
goodbye assholes
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
I do like replies, but not the ones I get from this board.
But otherwise, you might be right. I might stop posting ever again very soon. Not that anyone would notice. So far this board has offered me nothing but frustration, and I'm thinking it's not worth it anymore.
Goodbye.
